Military to civilian ship conversion

I also discovered that the soviets put some ex german and italian ships into service post ww2 including a conte-de-cavor class battleship but again this was considered by the west as a vanity project / political statement rather than a serious combatant.

Despite being rebuilt by the Italian navy to the extent of adding 40 feet of length, 6 knots speed and going from 12" to 12.6" main guns they were still basically a first generation dreadnought design that was obsolete by the standard of late WW1 designs such as Baden, Nevada or the Queen Elizabeths or even the Kongo class battlecruisers after refit.

Jonathan_S wrote:

munroburton wrote:Quite a lot at the end of WW1. The entire German navy was surrendered... and then scuttled by its crews. Most of the surviving ships were distributed to the various victors, but due to a combination of flooding damage, reverse-engineering tests, gunnery practice and post-war economic situation, none of them lasted long.

IIRC, the French and Italians each wanted a quarter of the surrendered ships.

And at the end of WWII there were some more major ships that were surrendered. But at least the US had a surplus of ships so they just did a comparative evaluation of the designs of the surrendered ships and then disposed of them (weapons tests, atomic weapons tests, museums, or scrapping)

But after boarding actions became impractical it was far more rare to capture reasonably repairable major ships during wartime. And after the end of the war there often wasn't the urgency to get every hull in the water - so the downsides of operating unsupported equipment outweigh the need for hulls in the water ASAP.

Several ships were surrendered to the Allies after WWII. IIRC Japan surrendered Nagato Sakawa 3 I-400 plus about 20-25 submarines 6-8 destroyers. Germany surrendered Prinz Eugan Leipzig Nuremberg Koln(?) 6-7 destroyers 10-15 submarines. IIRC the CL's were sunk with poison gas shells aboard PE target at Bikini.

If you start looking into it there are quite a few examples of ships being captured and put to use by the navy that captured them.

The Russian Battleship Oryol was captured by the Japanese navy in 1905 and put in service with the IJN for the next 17 years.

Jonathan_S wrote:
Not can't, just why would anyone bother?

Yep. You could convert an Iowa-class BB to a container ship, or a container ship to a battleship. But it'd be more expensive and slower than building what you want from scratch - even ignoring the inherent compromises in starting from so drastically different a starting point from your desired end.

You could even convert and Iowa-class to a modern guided missile anti-air ship. But except for potentially holding more missiles it wouldn't get you much beyond building one more Arleigh Burke - and you'd have to spend time pulling the heavy guns, cutting away deck and internal armor (and possibly superstructure) to make room for VLS cells.
And you end up with a much more expensive, slightly slower, manpower intensive fuel hog of a ship that doesn't do much for you. And you had to tie up a bigger construction dock for a lengthy time to do the conversion. Again, it's possible but why?[/quote]


------------------

Echoing --

Yes you "could" and it has been, but primarily at great need. Look up the history of the CVE's and CVL's.

The CVE's were primarily bulk cargo or oil tanker hulls with limited speed -- max approx. 12 Kts, assigned as support carriers for amphib operations or as aviation transports. (CVE = Combustible, Vulnerable, Expendable).
Most were retired post WWII.

The CVL's were built on heavy cruiser hulls (more protection than merchant hulls), carried twice the aircraft of the CVE's (about 2/3's that of the Essex/Hancocks) and had the speed to operate with the Essex class.

Both, however, were examples of expediency and the need to get aviation platforms into the war zone.

In many ways they are a parallel of the RMN Project Trojan Horse and later FSV series ships like Ginger's "CW"

-- Stewart

I think there would be a number of conversion possible.
Smaller ships (destroyers up to heavy cruiser) could be used as survey/explorer vessel. A very small but useful niche.

BC and SD could be converted into repair/construction vessels. There huge power and large crew quarters would be useful to construction crews. Given the current needs for improvements in orbital infrastructure through out the Empire, I could see this type of conversion.

The best thing about these conversions is that they can be done in less advanced yard like those in Silesia, or in neutrals like Erwhon.

rdelorme16 wrote:I think there would be a number of conversion possible.
Smaller ships (destroyers up to heavy cruiser) could be used as survey/explorer vessel. A very small but useful niche.

BC and SD could be converted into repair/construction vessels. There huge power and large crew quarters would be useful to construction crews. Given the current needs for improvements in orbital infrastructure through out the Empire, I could see this type of conversion.

The best thing about these conversions is that they can be done in less advanced yard like those in Silesia, or in neutrals like Erwhon.

Repair and construction ships are even more unlikely than straight freighter conversion. These ships are based off freighters for the large open spaces and carrying capacity and then have completely new facilities such as cranes, dry docks etc added.

Using a old warship you have to strip it down to an empty hull and then rebuild up. This is way more complex than a one way conversion. To do this you need the services of a full Capital ship slip to manage the coversion.

Silverwall wrote:

rdelorme16 wrote:I think there would be a number of conversion possible.
Smaller ships (destroyers up to heavy cruiser) could be used as survey/explorer vessel. A very small but useful niche.

BC and SD could be converted into repair/construction vessels. There huge power and large crew quarters would be useful to construction crews. Given the current needs for improvements in orbital infrastructure through out the Empire, I could see this type of conversion.

The best thing about these conversions is that they can be done in less advanced yard like those in Silesia, or in neutrals like Erwhon.

Repair and construction ships are even more unlikely than straight freighter conversion. These ships are based off freighters for the large open spaces and carrying capacity and then have completely new facilities such as cranes, dry docks etc added.

Using a old warship you have to strip it down to an empty hull and then rebuild up. This is way more complex than a one way conversion. To do this you need the services of a full Capital ship slip to manage the coversion.

To expand on this, a warship's frame, skin, and inner compartments are interlocked in such a way as to make them LESS suceptible to damage. To open up the interior to allow larger pieces of equipment for things like spare parts and repair equipment would compromise the integrity of the ship, not to mention being a cast-iron bitch to get through anyway, since the materials are designed to withstand damage. These tougher materials are used throughout the ship - internally and externally. They're NOT using 2x4 studs and drywall to separate compartments.

Freighters, on the other hand, are DESIGNED from the beginning to be open and spacious, and are made of materials not quite as tough to go through, mainly for cost reasons, but also because it's not necessary to armor a freighter.

So again, just like in the OTHER thread, it can be done, but WHY? Especially when you STILL NEED the infrastructure required for new builds to do the converting?

Not Freighters, Transports for People. Staterooms are pretty small. Removing missile tubes, which are much larger than missiles free up enough room for stateroom or observation passages. SD Manty or Solly have gymnasiums, have swimming pools, have Theatres, have quarters and bunk rooms and mess halls, Work shops, etc... Everything a transport for moving people about needs. Remove the missiles and many of the guns capacitors for the removed weapons etc. Add some extra life support and the ship just sitting in mothballs suddenly has life. The ship isn't going to be used for anything else.

MaxxQ wrote:
(Snippage)

To expand on this, a warship's frame, skin, and inner compartments are interlocked in such a way as to make them LESS suceptible to damage. To open up the interior to allow larger pieces of equipment for things like spare parts and repair equipment would compromise the integrity of the ship, not to mention being a cast-iron bitch to get through anyway, since the materials are designed to withstand damage. These tougher materials are used throughout the ship - internally and externally. They're NOT using 2x4 studs and drywall to separate compartments.

Freighters, on the other hand, are DESIGNED from the beginning to be open and spacious, and are made of materials not quite as tough to go through, mainly for cost reasons, but also because it's not necessary to armor a freighter.

So again, just like in the OTHER thread, it can be done, but WHY? Especially when you STILL NEED the infrastructure required for new builds to do the converting?

The best thing for all of that excess Solly iron is to put the equivalent of a pair of Mk 48 ADCAPS into them and be done with them. They have no purpose, once ONI, BUWEPS and BUSHIPS have gone through them looking for exploitable intelligence, other than to use them to exercise Marines and sailors in CSAR and boarding. Then use them for target practice. A few may even be allowed to go out with wedges and sidewalls up, in weapons evaluations or what the US Navy calls a "sink-ex".

Lord Skimper wrote:Not Freighters, Transports for People. Staterooms are pretty small. Removing missile tubes, which are much larger than missiles free up enough room for stateroom or observation passages. SD Manty or Solly have gymnasiums, have swimming pools, have Theatres, have quarters and bunk rooms and mess halls, Work shops, etc... Everything a transport for moving people about needs. Remove the missiles and many of the guns capacitors for the removed weapons etc. Add some extra life support and the ship just sitting in mothballs suddenly has life. The ship isn't going to be used for anything else.

Even though I have skimpy on ignore, something made me view this post anyway.

My intelligence just may have dropped to his level now

Skimpy, can you PLEASE start using the gray matter between your ears? Can you PLEASE start thinking about the ramifications of what you just proposed?

Do you remember the kind of environment these ships fight and travel in? A VACUUM. With big honkin' hatches leading directly to it.

Do you see airlocks between the weapons ports and their bays behind them? Do you think those areas, including the magazines, are pressurized when not in use? If you do, then you'd be wrong. That would be completely pointless and a waste of resources.

Which means, if it hasn't percolated through your skull yet, that the ships would have to be sealed in those areas to prevent air from leaking out. You would ALSO have to run vents, ducts, wiring, water, waste disposal, and all the other sundry things through the armored bulkheads, along the armored walls, and through and along the armored decks and deckheads to make those spaces livable. Let's not forget having to seal the holes where the aforementioned weapons port hatches were, because you'll have to do that as well. No one is going to trust that a single hatch will be safe enough to sit behind in their underwear watching the latest season of Preston of the Spaceways in their stateroom. No, they're going to want a solid chunk of something there.

Oh yeah, not to mention the big honking HOLES you'd have to cut in the hull to get the armored magazines OUT in the first place (assuming they're similar to what I've done for the Fearless - maybe not. I suppose the Sollies might do something different). Then, reseal the big honkin' holes. This isn't mere battle steel you'd be trying to cut through - this armor is a lot tougher than that. Battle steel is basically just a framework that the rest of the armor is grown over.

I would imagine that the RMN/SKM has standards of safety for passengers/personnel that travel aboard SPACEships, which means you can't just cap off the plasma conduits that feed the capacitors that power the missile launchers and energy weapons - those would have to be ripped out and capped well away from anywhere "passengers" may be "living".

Let's talk about doors/hatches. They (and the associated equipment needed to operate them, since they aren't just doors on hinges like you have leading to your bathroom - where most of your ideas belong) would need to be embedded into the ARMORED bulkheads. See above for the fun you'll have doing that.

I'm sure I've forgotten or not thought of other things, but I think those are enough of a start to maybe get you to start thinking about everything that goes into doing the things you come up with. Probably not, since nothing anyone has said to you before has managed to stick.

Last thing - don't come up with any more ideas until you can figure out how to do depot-level maintenance without a depot to do the maintenance in. Then, also before you write something up, think about what the RMN will do with the depot once it DOES exist again - they sure as hell won't use it for tearing apart and rebuilding crap ships into slightly less crappy passenger liners that no RMN citizen in their right mind would ride on - it's Solly crap. Think they're going to trust it?